BANK OF BARODA & ORS. versus GANPAT SINGH DEORA

Citation: [2008] 17 S.C.R. 1151 · Decided: 18-12-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ALTAMAS KABIR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

( 
-1 
(2008] 17 S.C.R. 1151 
BANK OF BARODA & ORS. 
v. 
GANPAT SINGH DEORA 
(Civil Appeal No. 7417 of 2008) 
DECEMBER 18, 2008 
[ALTAMAS KABIR AND MARKANDEY KAT JU, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Service Law - Pension - Entitlement to - For employees 
opting for voluntary retirement under a scheme - Respondent 
bank employee - Applied for voluntary retirement under the c 
2001 Scheme - Application was accepted and respondent 
was paid all retiral benefits under the Scheme - But his 
request for grant of pension in addition to other retiral benefits 
not acceded to by the Bank - Held: Regulation 28 of the 
Pension Regulations, 1995, after amendment made 
provision for situations similar to the one in the instant case D 
- Respondent not entitled to pension as he did not complete 
required length of qualifying service as provided under reg.28 
- Bank of Baroda (Employees Pension) Regulations, 1995 
- Regulation 28 (as amended on 2nd January, 2004) - Bank 
of Baroda Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme,2001. 
E 
Respondent, an employee in appellant bank, applied 
for voluntary retirement under the Bank of Baroda 
Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2001 
(BOBEVRS-2001 }. At the relevant time, respondent was 
40 years of age and had completed only 13 years of F 
service. His application for voluntary retirement was 
accepted by the Bank and he was paid all retiral benefits 
applicable to him under the Scheme, but his request for 
grant of pension in addition to the other retiral benefits 
was not acceded to by the Bank. 
G 
The question which arose for consideration in the 
present appeal was whether respondent was entitled to 
pension. 
Allowing Jhe appeal, the Court 
1151 
H 
1152 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2008] 17 S.C.R. 
A 
HELD:1.1. Regulation 2 of the Voluntary Retirement 
Scheme, 2001, of the appellant-Bank prescribes a period . 
of qualifying service for an employee to be eligible to 
.:i. 
apply for voluntary retirement. On the other hand, 
Regulations 14 and 29 of the Pension Regulations, 1995, 
8 relate to the period of qualifying service for pension under 
the said Regulations, in two different situations. While 
Regulation 14 provides that in order to be eligible for. 
pension an employee would have to render a minimum 
of 10 years service, Regulation 29 is applicable to the 
employees choosing to retire from service prematurely, 
c and in their case the period of qualifying service would 
be 15 years. The facts of this case, however, do not 
attract the provisions of Regulation 29 since the 
respondent accepted the offer of voluntary retirement 
under the Scheme framed by the Bank and not OIJ his 
D own volition de· hors any Scheme of Voluntary 
Retirement. In such a case, Regulation 14 read with 
Regulation 32 providing for premature retirement would 
not also apply to the case of the respondent. [Para 19) 
[1159-E-G] 
I 
E 
1.2. While Regulation 2 of the BOBEVRS-2001 speaks 
of eligibility for applying under the Scheme, Regulation 
14 of the Pension Regulations, 1995, contemplates a 
situation whereunder an employee would be eligible for 
premature pension. The two provisions are for two 
different purposes and for two different situations. [Para 
F 19) [1159-H; 1160-A] 
2. Regulation 28 of the Pension Regulations, 1995, 
after amendment made provision for situations similar to 
the one in the instant case. In the absence of any 
particular provision for payment of pension to those who 
G opted for BOBEVRS-2001 other than Regulation 11 (ii) of 
the Scheme, one has to fall back. on the Pension 
Regulations, 1995, and the amended provisions of 
Regulation 28 which brings within the scope of. 
Superannuation Pension, employees who opted for the 
H Voluntary Retirement Scheme, which will be clear from 
BANK OF BARODA & ORS. v. GANPAT SINGH DEORA 1153 
Explanatory Memorandum. However, the period of A 
qualifying service has been retained as 15 years for 
,, 
~ 
those opting for BOBEVRS-2001 and is treated differently 
from premature retirement where the minimum period of 
qualifying service has been fixed at 10 years in keeping 
with Regulation 14 of the Pension Regulations, 1995. 
B 
Respondent was not eligible for pension as he had not 
completed the required length of qualifying service as 
provided under Regulation 28 of the 1995 Regulations. 
[Paras 19 and 20] [1160-A-E] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. c 
7417 of 2008. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.12.2006 of the 
High Court of Rajasthan at Jodh
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.